Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Why it matters that Gen Z voters are not a monolith

Opinion

Gen Z voter

Hannah Emerson, 22, voted in Ohio's May 22 primary. She is part of the most diverse generation of voters.

Jeff Swensen/Getty Images

Guillermo is the CEO of Ignite, a political leadership program for young women.

Some editorial writers are keen to describe the looming midterms as "the inflation election." Then again, their average readers are millionaires by household net worth. They skew 62 percent male and in their 40s. The last time I checked, the great thing about America is that it's a democracy. It includes non-millionaires. It includes women. It includes young people. It may still be news to some people, but Generation Z is increasingly influencing the outcome of elections.

Not only is our democracy diverse – the power and importance of the youth vote is also increasing. Gen Z and millennial voters will soon dominate the electorate. And particularly amongst those voters, we can't assume the issues dominating the stuffier editorials are all that count. My organization, Ignite, ran a comprehensive research survey of Gen Z youth recently and its findings were stark.


Members of Gen Z are almost twice as likely to turn out and vote this year than they were in 2018, from 35 percent to 59 percent. While inflation appears to be the leading issue motivating young voters, when you take cisgender men out of the equation, the results offer a notable contrast. For young women as well as trans and gender-nonconforming people, the top issues skew differently. Health care, mass shootings, mental health, racial inequity and abortion are their top motivators.

As political strategists are observing, women are registering to vote across the country. They're doing so in numbers that are unheard of. The recent Kansas primary is a strong test case for the power of reproductive rights as an issue. But it's about much more than abortion. If we're going to call this election anything, let's call it the young women's election. Because it's their voices that are diverging most from the major narratives in the news.

Ask any major political strategist from David Axelrod to Karl Rove. They'll tell you that when you have a large group whose views diverge from major narratives, you need to pay attention.

Gen Z is the most diverse generation on racial lines. About 17 million people will turn 18 between the 2020 and 2024 elections; 49 percent of them will be young people of color. Gen Z is also very queer: 30 percent identify as other than heterosexual, compared to only 5 percent of boomers who say similar.

Further, young people are less likely to align with a given political party. Gen Z now has two candidates — one in each party — with a chance of heading to Congress. Twenty-five-year-old Karoline Leavitt won the Republican nomination in New Hampshire's 1st district. In Florida, 25-year-old Democrat Maxwell Frost also won a crowded primary. At the local level, Gen Z is making even stronger headwinds. We saw 18-year old Shiva Rajbhandari make headlines winning his school board race in Boise, Idaho – and I can name a dozen Ignite young women who launched their campaigns for local and state office this year.

For today's young people, it's clear. Voting is no laughing matter. Some issues at stake are even likely to decide whether the planet is a habitable place to live by the time they grow old. We should at the very least factor their voices more as we shape our own narratives on the issues in any election. But I'm especially talking about this one.


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less